Inselman, Jonathan

Abstract Background Hodgkin lymphoma is a rare hematological malignancy, with 8,500 new cases per year in the United States. Prior studies in oncology have shown that higher patient volume, whether at the treatment facility or provider level, is associated with reduced mortality and improved overall survival (OS). We used a national oncology data set to test our hypothesis that a volume-outcome relationship may also exist in classical Hodgkin lymphoma. Methods Using the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB), we identified patients diagnosed with classical Hodgkin lymphoma between 2003 and 2014. The NCDB is a nationwide oncology outcomes database for ~70% of newly diagnosed cases from more than 1,500 accredited cancer programs in the United States and Puerto Rico. We classified the facilities by quartiles (Q; mean patients with HL treated per year): Q1: < 3.19, Q2: 3.2 to 5.0, Q3: 5.01 to 9.19, and Q4: ≥9.2. Our primary outcome of interest was all-cause mortality. We used random intercepts to account for clustering of patients within facilities and a Cox regression model to determine the volume-outcome relationship, adjusting for demographic (sex, age, race, ethnicity), socioeconomic (income, education, insurance type), geographic (area of residence, treatment facility location, travel distance), and comorbid (Charlson-Deyo score) factors, as well as year of diagnosis. Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed to examine the impact of patient volume (by quartile) on overall survival. Results There were 47,633 patients with classical Hodgkin lymphoma treated at 1,310 facilities. The median age at diagnosis was 40 years, and 54.2% were men. The median annual facility volume was 2.7 patients per year (range, 1 to 42.8). The distribution of facilities according to patient volume was: Q1: 58.4%, Q2: 22.4%, Q3: 13.3%, and Q4: 5.9%. After a median follow-up of 58 months, the highest volume quartile (Q4) had significantly higher 5- and 12-year overall survival rates compared to Q1-Q3 (Table 1). Overall survival by quartile is depicted as a Kaplan-Meier curve (Figure 1). Compared to the patients treated at Q4 facilities, those treated at lower-quartile facilities had a higher risk of death (Q3 hazard ratio [HR], 1.18 [95% CI, 1.10 to 1.27]; Q2 HR, 1.21 [95% CI, 1.13 to 1.30]; Q1 HR, 1.19 [95% CI, 1.11 to 1.28]) after adjustment for the sociodemographic factors discussed in our methods. Multivariable analysis showed that facility volume as a continuous variable was independently associated with all-cause mortality (Figure 2) (P<0.0001). Compared with facilities treating 10 patients per year, facilities treating 20, 30, and 40 patients per year had approximately 10%, 17%, and 23% lower overall mortality rates. Conclusions Patients treated for classical Hodgkin lymphoma at higher-volume facilities had a lower risk of mortality compared with those treated at lower-volume facilities. This adds to the growing body of evidence that a volume-outcomes relationship exists in some of the less common hematologic malignancies. Further research is needed to ascertain whether such differences in survival are related to provider-level or facility-level attributes, and whether patients with Hodgkin lymphoma will benefit from referral to high-volume centers. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

6581 Background: While AC is recommended for all patients with stage IIA, IIB, and IIIA NSCLC, its use and benefit among the elderly population is unclear. Methods: We identified patients with stage IIA, IIB, or IIIA NSCLC using the National Cancer Database from 2006-2014. Patients were divided into age groups ≤65, 66-70, 71-75, 76-80, > 80 years. Trends in AC use, factors influencing AC administration, and outcomes associated with AC were studied. Results: Out of 27368 patients, 13464 received AC and 13904 did not. 11% had stage IIA disease, 50% had stage IIB disease and 39% had stage IIIA disease. AC use was lower with increasing age (49% age ≤65 vs. 3% age > 80 (P < 0.0001)). Temporal use of chemotherapy for each age group was unchanged from 2006-2014. In multivariate logistic regression analysis, factors predictive of lower AC use were older age, Medicare or Medicaid insurance, academic center, and higher Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). Stage IIIA (OR 1.4, 95% CI 1.3-1.6) and Stage IIB (OR 1.3, 95% CI 1.2-1.4) had a higher chance of receiving AC than stage IIA. In a Cox proportional hazard model, younger age, female sex, academic center, private insurance, higher income, lower CCI, West coast center and AC were associated with better outcomes. When stratified by age and stage, AC was still associated with better survival (Table). Conclusions: AC utilization in stages IIA, IIB and IIIA NSCLC remains low, despite its association with improved survival in the elderly. Future clinical trials may be needed focused on elderly patients to establish the best regimen to optimize outcomes. [Table: see text]

Background: Stroke prevention using warfarin is challenging in AF patients with CKD, due to high bleeding risk and difficulties in the INR control. NOACs provide alternative options, but all have greater degrees of renal clearance. This study aimed to compare the outcomes of apixaban, dabigatran, rivaroxaban, and warfarin across the range of kidney function in patients with AF. Methods: Using a US administrative database including private insurance or Medicare Advantage patients with linked claims and laboratory data, we identified 34,569 new users of oral anticoagulants with AF and eGFR ≥15 between 10/1/2010-11/29/2017. Stabilized IPTW balanced four treatment groups on 66 baseline characteristics. The primary outcomes included stroke, major bleeding, and mortality. Weighted Cox proportional hazards models compared treatments in the overall population and in each eGFR subgroup, with mortality as a competing risk for stroke and major bleeding. Results: The proportion of patients using warfarin increased as the kidney function declined - 26.5%, 30.4%, 34.6%, 40.5%, and 55.0% of patients were prescribed warfarin in eGFR ≥90, 60-90, 45-60, 30-45, 15-30 groups, respectively. In comparison to warfarin, apixaban was associated with a lower risk of stroke, major bleeding, and mortality; dabigatran was associated with a similar risk of stroke, and a lower risk of major bleeding and mortality; rivaroxaban was associated with a lower risk of stroke, major bleeding, and mortality (Figure). When comparing one NOAC to another NOAC, apixaban and dabigatran were associated with a lower risk of major bleeding than rivaroxaban (HR 0.61 [0.51-0.73], p<0.001 for apixaban versus rivaroxaban; HR 0.67 [0.50-0.90], p=0.007 for dabigatran versus rivaroxaban); dabigatran was associated with a higher risk of stroke than apixaban (HR 1.65 [1.11-2.46], p=0.01); there was no difference in mortality. There was no significant interaction between treatment and eGFR categories for any outcome, but the number of patients with low eGFR was small. Conclusions: In practice, relative to warfarin, NOACs are progressively less commonly used with increasing degree of renal dysfunction. However, each NOAC was consistently associated with at least equivalent effectiveness and safety compared with warfarin across the range of kidney function.

ObjectivesTo evaluate the ability of claims‐based risk adjustment and incremental components of clinical data to identify 90‐day episode costs among lower extremity joint replacement (LEJR) patients according to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) program provisions.Data SourcesMedicare fee‐for‐service (FFS) data for qualifying CJR episodes in the United States, and FFS data linked with clinical data from CJR‐qualifying LEJR episodes performed at High Value Healthcare Collaborative (HVHC) and Mayo Clinic in 2013. HVHC and Mayo Clinic populations are subsets of the total FFS population to assess the additive value of additional pieces of clinical data in correctly assigning patients to cost groups.Study DesignMultivariable logistic models identified high‐cost episodes.Data Collection/Extraction MethodsClinical data from participating health care systems merged with Medicare FFS data.Principal FindingsOur three populations consisted of 363 621 patients in the CMS population, 4881 in the HVHC population, and 918 in the Mayo population. When modeling per CJR specifications, we observed low to moderate model performance (CMS C‐Stat = 0.714; HVHC C‐Stat = 0.628; Mayo C‐Stat = 0.587). Adding CMS‐HCC categories improved identification of patients in the top 20% of episode costs (CMS C‐Stat = 0.758, HVHC C‐Stat = 0.692, Mayo C‐Stat = 0.677). Clinical variables, particularly functional status in the population for which this was available (Mayo C‐Stat = 0.783), improved ability to identify patients within cost groups.ConclusionsPolicy makers could use these findings to improve payment adjustments for bundled LEJR procedures and in consideration of new data elements for reimbursement.

AbstractBackgroundPatients at low risk for acute coronary syndrome are frequently admitted for observation and cardiac testing, resulting in substantial burden and cost to the patient and the health care system.ObjectivesThe purpose of this investigation was to measure the effect of the Chest Pain Choice (CPC) decision aid on overall health care utilization as well as utilization of specific services both during the index emergency department (ED) visit and in the subsequent 45 days.MethodsThis was a planned secondary analysis of data from a pragmatic multicenter randomized trial of shared decision making in adults presenting to the ED with chest pain who were being considered for observation unit admission for cardiac stress testing or coronary computed tomography angiography. The trial compared an intervention group engaged in shared decision making facilitated by the CPC decision aid to a control group receiving usual care. Hospital‐level billing data were used to measure utilization for the index ED visit and during the following 45 days. Patients in both groups also were asked to keep a diary recording health care utilization over the same 45‐day period. Outcomes assessed included length of time in the ED and observation, ED visits, office visits, hospitalizations, testing, imaging, and procedures.ResultsOf the 898 patients included in the original trial, we were able to contact 834 (92.9%) patients for 45‐day health care diary review. There was no difference in patient‐reported health care utilization between the study arms. Hospital‐level billing data were obtained for all 898 (100%) patients. During the initial ED visit the length of stay (LOS) was similar, and there was no difference in the frequency of observation unit admission between study arms. However, the mean observation unit LOS was 95 minutes (95% confidence interval [CI] = 40.8–149.8) shorter in the CPC arm and the mean number of tests was lower in the CPC arm (decrease in 19.4 imaging studies per 100 patients, 95% CI = 15.5–23.3). When evaluating the entire encounter and follow‐up period, the intervention arm underwent fewer tests (decrease in 125.6 tests per 100 patients, 95% CI = 29.3–221.6). More specifically, there were fewer advanced cardiac imaging tests completed (25.8 fewer per 100 patients, 95% CI = 3.74–47.9) in the intervention arm.ConclusionsShared decision making in low‐risk chest pain can lead to decreased diagnostic testing without worsening outcomes measured over 45 days.

Background. We test the hypotheses that use of the Chest Pain Choice (CPC) decision aid (DA) would be similarly effective in potentially vulnerable subgroups but increase knowledge more in patients with higher education and trust in physicians more in patients from racial minority groups. Methods. This was a secondary analysis of a multicenter randomized trial in adults with chest pain potentially due to acute coronary syndrome. The trial compared an intervention group engaged in shared decision making (SDM) using CPC to a control group receiving usual care (UC). We assessed for subgroup effects based on age, sex, race, income, insurance, education, literacy, and numeracy. We dichotomized each characteristic and tested for interactions using regression models with indicators for arm assignment and study site. Results. Of 898 patients (451 DA, 447 UC), over 50% were female, over one-third were black, nearly one-third had a high school education or less, and over 60% had “low” health literacy. The DA did not increase knowledge more in patients with higher education ( P for interaction = 0.06) but did increase knowledge more in the “typical” than in the “low” numeracy subgroup (10.6% v. 4.7%, absolute difference [AD] = 5.9%, P for interaction = 0.025). The DA did not significantly increase patient trust in physicians in racial minorities ( P for interaction = 0.06) but did increase trust more in patients with “low” literacy compared with those with “typical” literacy (3.7% v. –1.4%, AD = 5.1, P for interaction = 0.011). Conclusions. CPC benefited all sociodemographic groups to a similar extent, with greater knowledge transfer in patients with higher numeracy and greater physician trust in patients with “low” health literacy. Tailoring SDM interventions to patient characteristics may be necessary for optimal effectiveness.

110 Background: Assessment of compliance with national quality guidelines for the management of melanoma may be complicated by controversy about selection of patients for nodal surgery and limited by a lack of data on quality metrics. Previous reports suggest suboptimal overall compliance, with sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) not performed for many suitable patients and completion lymph node dissection (CLND) omitted in many biopsy-proven node-positive (LN+) cases. The purpose of this study was to assess compliance with national ASCO/SSO guidelines for lymph node (LN) surgery for T2 and T3 (intermediate thickness, 1.01-4.00 mm) primary cutaneous melanoma patients and elucidate factors associated with non-compliance. Methods: All cases of T2 and T3, M0 melanoma were identified from 2004-2010 SEER data. Multivariable logistic regression was utilized to identify independent predictors of compliance. Five-year cancer specific survival (CSS) was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: Overall, 75.3% (6,609/8,782) of T2-T3 primary cutaneous melanoma patients underwent LN staging including SLNB in 6,330 (74.5%) of 8,492 clinically LN negative patients. Among these 6,609 patients, 1,279 (19.4%) had one or more LN+. 940 LN+ patients (73.4%) underwent CLND with removal of a mean (median, IQR) of 20.7 (18, 11-27) LNs. Compliance with LN staging and management guidelines was associated with truncal primary site (for SLNB), p<0.001 and with patient age <65 yrs and increasing number of metastatic LNs (for CLND), both p<0.0001. Compliance with CLND for LN+ patients was associated with improved 5 year CSS: 70.0% vs 64.6%, p<0.001. Conclusions: Compliance with guidelines for LN surgery in T2 and T3 melanoma is poor despite the well-defined benefit for this group of patients. These data suggest that non-compliance is multifactorial and not simply due to practice differences arising from the controversial aspects of melanoma management. Room for improvement exists. Assessment of modifiable factors associated with poor compliance, design of strategies to improve compliance and the development of performance measures around appropriate LN staging and management of T2 and T3 melanoma deserve further investigation.